What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5036248 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s name and identifying details must not be published.

How much money was awarded in case 5036248?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5036248?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5036248?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11304020-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5036248 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s name and identifying details must not be published.

How much money was awarded in case 5036248?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5036248?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5036248?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11304020-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

25 Cranbrook Place, Rototuna North, Hamilton 3210 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5036248 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5036248. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Insurance excess for dishwasher replacement	$550.00		Insurance excess for dishwasher replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement

The tenant’s name and identifying details must not be published.

[The tenant] must pay Lugton's Limited as agent for Kristal Snow $577.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Insurance excess for dishwasher replacement$550.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$577.00

Reasons

The hearing was conducted on Microsoft Teams.

Jordan Ridgeway attended for the landlord.

The tenant attended in person.

The landlord has applied an order for $550.00 which was the landlord’s excess for replacing the dishwasher which ceased working during the tenancy.

The dishwasher was supplied new during the tenancy in October of 2023 but broke down less than a year later.

Is the tenant liable for the damage to the dishwasher?

Ms Ridgeway submits the tenant is liable for the damage to the dishwasher. The landlord’s contractors found a small chicken bone in the dishwasher pump’s inlet which caused the motor to seize and burn out. Ms Ridgeway arranged for one of the contractors, Harley from CSR Electrical who gave evidence confirming he had received that advice from another contractor.

Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. 1

The tenant submitted that she and her husband always rinsed their dishes before placing them in the dishwasher and the dishwasher’s filters should have prevented any detritus from getting through to the motor. However, Harley says modern dishwashers are susceptible to damage from small debris and dishes have to thoroughly rinsed to ensure that even small debris does not infiltrate the motor. That is what happened here.

I am satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.

I am not satisfied that the tenant and her husband were not careless in their use of the dishwasher. Carelessness means less than reasonably prudent. The facts is that small bones must have got into the dishwasher filters and pump inlet. It would have been reasonably prudent of the tenant and her husband to ensure that did not occur.

Therefore, the tenant is liable for the damage. The Tribunal orders the tenant to reimburse the landlord for their insurance excess. Filing fee

The tenant must reimburse the landlord for the filing fee. 2 Non-publication

The Tribunal may on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that the name or any identifying particulars of any party not be published. 3 1 See Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), ss 40(2)(a), 41, and 49B RTA. 2 RTA, s 102(4)(a). 3 RTA, s 95A(4).

There was a joke doing the traps that: “In every relationship there is one person who stacks the dishwasher like a Scandinavian architect and one who stacks it like a racoon under the influence”. Dishwashing detergent advertisements encourage us to rinse and stack dishes like a racoon. This case illustrates we all have to be more like a Scandinavian architect when we rinse dishes prior to stacking them. It is a “there but for the grace of god go I situation”.

Ms Ridgeway says the tenant was an ideal tenant in every way. It is just that in this case the tenant or her husband were momentarily inattentive when rinsing a dish. It would not be in the public interest for the tenants future tenancy prospects to be dampened by her name being published in this decision in these circumstances.

Therefore, the Tribunal orders that the tenant’s name is not to be published.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5036248. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Insurance excess for dishwasher replacement	$550.00		Insurance excess for dishwasher replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement

Order

The tenant’s name and identifying details must not be published.
[The tenant] must pay Lugton's Limited as agent for Kristal Snow $577.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Insurance excess for dishwasher replacement$550.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$577.00

Reasons

The hearing was conducted on Microsoft Teams.
Jordan Ridgeway attended for the landlord.
The tenant attended in person.
The landlord has applied an order for $550.00 which was the landlord’s excess for replacing the dishwasher which ceased working during the tenancy.
The dishwasher was supplied new during the tenancy in October of 2023 but broke down less than a year later.

Is the tenant liable for the damage to the dishwasher?

Ms Ridgeway submits the tenant is liable for the damage to the dishwasher. The landlord’s contractors found a small chicken bone in the dishwasher pump’s inlet which caused the motor to seize and burn out. Ms Ridgeway arranged for one of the contractors, Harley from CSR Electrical who gave evidence confirming he had received that advice from another contractor.
Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. 1
The tenant submitted that she and her husband always rinsed their dishes before placing them in the dishwasher and the dishwasher’s filters should have prevented any detritus from getting through to the motor. However, Harley says modern dishwashers are susceptible to damage from small debris and dishes have to thoroughly rinsed to ensure that even small debris does not infiltrate the motor. That is what happened here.
I am satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.
I am not satisfied that the tenant and her husband were not careless in their use of the dishwasher. Carelessness means less than reasonably prudent. The facts is that small bones must have got into the dishwasher filters and pump inlet. It would have been reasonably prudent of the tenant and her husband to ensure that did not occur.
Therefore, the tenant is liable for the damage. The Tribunal orders the tenant to reimburse the landlord for their insurance excess. Filing fee
The tenant must reimburse the landlord for the filing fee. 2 Non-publication
The Tribunal may on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that the name or any identifying particulars of any party not be published. 3 1 See Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), ss 40(2)(a), 41, and 49B RTA. 2 RTA, s 102(4)(a). 3 RTA, s 95A(4).
There was a joke doing the traps that: “In every relationship there is one person who stacks the dishwasher like a Scandinavian architect and one who stacks it like a racoon under the influence”. Dishwashing detergent advertisements encourage us to rinse and stack dishes like a racoon. This case illustrates we all have to be more like a Scandinavian architect when we rinse dishes prior to stacking them. It is a “there but for the grace of god go I situation”.
Ms Ridgeway says the tenant was an ideal tenant in every way. It is just that in this case the tenant or her husband were momentarily inattentive when rinsing a dish. It would not be in the public interest for the tenants future tenancy prospects to be dampened by her name being published in this decision in these circumstances.
Therefore, the Tribunal orders that the tenant’s name is not to be published.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5036248 — Property damage at 25 Cranbrook Place, Rototuna North, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5036248 — Property damage at 25 Cranbrook Place, Rototuna North, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant liable for the damage to the dishwasher?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant liable for the damage to the dishwasher?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions